被害人与恢复性司法的质疑与回应

恢复性司法作为一种新的刑事司法模式在国际上得到了普遍的认可,并已成为当今世界的一种潮流。然而,恢复性司法自其产生之日起一直受到诸多批评。因此有必要对被害人参与犯罪处理威胁“罚当其罪（Justice Deserts）”理论、仁慈与宽恕是被害人的义务与负担、被害人不满意恢复性司法的处理结果等问题,从理论、立法、实践等多个角度予以回应,以期对我国的恢复性司法制度建设有所裨益。     

荷兰:社区矫正与恢复性司法结合之路

荷兰的社区矫正与恢复性司法实践活动,类型多样,效果显著。而社区矫正与恢复性司法的结合,对保障社会安全很有助益,将是未来发展的方向。     

论诸法学流派对法律方法的理论支援

法律方法理论不仅受规范法学理论的制约和支持,而且也受其他法学流派的制约和支持。不同法学流派所支持的具体法律方法不尽相同。如价值法学之于价值衡量、社会法学之于事实替代、规范法学之于效力识别、经济分析法学之于利益衡量、多元论法学之于法律续造等,都更容易产生支持效果。尽管不同法学流派各自支持不同的法律方法,但这不否定某一法律方法受多个法学流派理论支援的情形,也不否定一个法学流派可以支持多种法律方法的情形。     

沈家本的司法观

沈家本无疑是中华法系走向近代化的关键人物。他整理我国历代刑制,撷取近代西方法学先进理念,终将古老中国延续千年的律法带入近代。沈家本的司法观在清末改革过程中渐趋成熟,并在新律修订中得到较为完整的呈现:其一,司法独立,司法权与行政权应相互分离;其二,法制统一,法律不应有厚薄之殊;其三,刑罚应以教化为要,刑罚轻缓、狱制文明;其四,尊重人权,废止人口买卖。     

Rethinking the restorative–retributive dichotomy: is reconciliation possible?

While the use of restorative justice within Western criminal justice systems continues to grow, its philosophical foundations remain uncertain. This inconclusiveness impacts directly upon the theoretical discussion of restorative justice and its relationship with existing paradigms of punishment, precipitating debate regarding its ability to integrate within justice systems governed by retributive paradigms. Specifically, this ambiguity of definition renders debate regarding the extent to which restorative justice philosophy exists as an alternative punishment or an alternative to punishment, and its existence as complementary or axiomatic to retributive justice unresolved. The philosophy of restorative justice, identifying its central features and addressing those previous attempts of contrasting restorative justice with the prevailing paradigm of retribution is explored here. However, it is suggested that aspirations of reconciling restorative justice philosophy with the retributive paradigm will be ultimately unsuccessful, due to the persistent latent ambiguity regarding the central foundation upon which restorative justice philosophy is built. Such concerns are also present when seeking to affirm the continued opposition of retributive and restorative justice.     

Teaching to shift people’s thinking toward peace: the relevance of Colman McCarthy’s work for peacemaking criminology

Peacemaking criminology is often conceived as a theoretical perspective built upon linkages between religious, feminist, and critical traditions. Equally important in peacemaking criminology is its teaching tradition, which promotes educating people about the values of peace, integration, cooperation, and caring over the values of control, repression, power, and domination. Teaching from a peacemaking perspective has generally involved efforts to design crime‐related courses that feature core concepts, readings, and policies within peacemaking criminology writings. However, such peacemaking teaching and writings have not commonly provided a central focus upon what needs to be taught to shift people’s thinking. This article thereby illustrates the work of peace educator Colman McCarthy, whose teaching experiences in high schools and universities are predicated upon influencing teenagers and young adults to embrace the idea that nothing can matter more than the struggle for and embracing of peace. This article also explores the ways in which Colman McCarthy’s books, I’d Rather Teach Peace and All of One Peace: Essays on Nonviolence, offer a foundation to help people shift their thinking toward a culture of nonviolence and peace.     

Effect of time and relationships on victim–offender dialogue completion in felony cases

Victim–offender dialogues (VODs) often take place in organizational contexts, the stakeholders of which may very well be interested in measures of program effectiveness such as completion rates. When reported, completion rates typically ranged from 40 to 60%. At the time of this study, Ohio’s VOD program was completing just 25% of initiated cases and program stakeholders were unsure as to the cause(s). An archived data analysis was performed on a sample (n?=?212) of the Office of Victim Services (OVS) completed and will-not-proceed files. One hypothesis and two research questions make use of archived data to explore this felony VOD context. The amount of time between the date the crime occurred and the date on which the dialogue file was initiated was not a significant predictor of dialogue completion. However, both victim-offender’s pre-crime relationship and dialogue file initiator were found to significantly impact dialogue completion rates. These results are considered in light of social exchange and uncertainty reduction theories.     

Frenemies: restorative justice and customary mechanisms of justice

More often than not, restorative justice is said to take roots in Indigenous practices. In fact, Indigenous and other traditional mechanisms of justice are often described as examples of restorative justice practices. In New Zealand, the government equates the Mãori approach to doing justice with family group conferences (FGC); a restorative justice mechanism which it claims embodies Mãori values and preferences. This article contends, however, that the type of ‘justice’ embodied in customary mechanisms, has often been taken out of context, and rendered universal and ahistorical through its representation as restorative justice mechanisms. Using fieldwork evidence, an analytical comparison between principles of restorative practices, New Zealand’s FGCs and the Mãori approach to justice was conducted. It concludes that this tendency to equate restorative justice with Indigenous approaches to law and justice is harmful and dangerous for it risks rendering the scholarship homogenizing and universalizing restorative justice, to the detriment of local preferences and practices.     

Restorative justice: the indigenous justice system

Dramatically different beliefs about justice will produce dramatically different methods for achieving justice. The beliefs underlying the traditional Indigenous restorative justice systems, systems that dramatically differ from the European-based system practiced in the USA are presented. The discussion highlights the legacy of colonialism for tribal communities and the resilience and creative resistance that have continued to characterize the spirit and ingenuity of Indigenous peoples.     

What restorative justice might learn from administrative theory

Two administrative ideal‐types related to competing forms of justice: retributive and restorative include ontological and epistemological foundations and associated organizational theory. The alternate understandings are coherently linked with the principles of justice informing retributive and restorative practices. Retributive justice is linked to formal organization based on instrumental rationality and individualist ontology, while restorative justice is linked to substantive organization based on ethical reasoning and relational ontology. Once constructed, ideal‐types can be used both to assess actual conditions on key characteristics as well as to make recommendations for organizational design. Therefore, conclusions are drawn about the importance of matching context to purpose, pointing toward further empirical research that will inform system design for restorative justice practices.